Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32898 of 2021 Applicant :- Bharat Pal @ Bharat Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rohit Yadav,Ambarish Chatterji Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Rohit Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pankaj Mishra, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Bharat Pal @ Bharat, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.82 of 2021, under Sections 302, 201 IPC, registered at Police Station Basai, District Firozabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that although the applicant along with one unknown person is named in the FIR but the naming of the applicant is on the basis of suspicion only. It is further argued that the first informant has stated that the applicant had a motive to commit the murder of his son as previously there was some dispute between them, as such he has murdered him. The present case is a case of circumstantial evidence. There is no eye-witness to the murder. The links in the chain are conspicuously missing. The implication of the applicant in the present case is sought on the basis of his confessional statement to the police which is an inadmissible evidence. There is no recovery of any incriminating article either from the possession of the applicant or at his pointing out. The doctor conducting postmortem examination has opined the cause of death due to asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem smothering. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 22 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 21.06.2021.
Per contra learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant had motive to commit the murder of the son of the first informant due to previous enmity and there is confession of the applicant to the police, as such applicant is involved in the present case.
After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that naming of the applicant in the FIR is on the basis of suspicion only and then there is confession of the applicant to the police. The present case is a case of circumstantial evidence. There is no eye-witness to the murder. There is no other evidence against the applicant.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicant-Bharat Pal @ Bharat, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.
(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229- A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
The bail application is allowed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
(Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 24.9.2021 Gaurav